SynthesisObesity surgery2026
Conversion to One-Anastomosis Gastric Bypass versus Roux-en-Y Gastric Bypass for Treatment of Gastroesophageal Reflux Disease after Sleeve Gastrectomy: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.
Synthesis in Obesity surgery, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundSleeve gastrectomy (SG) may precipitate or worsen gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD), sometimes necessitating conversion to gastric bypass. Both Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB) and one-anastomosis gastric bypass (OAGB) have been proposed as revisional procedures, yet comparative data on GERD outcomes remain limited.
methodsThis study encompassed analysis of PubMed/MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane CENTRAL, Scopus, Web of Science, and ClinicalTrials.gov from database inception through November 2024. Studies comparing OAGB with RYGB as conversion procedures after failed SG were included. Primary outcomes were GERD resolution rate and de novo GERD incidence. Secondary outcomes included weight loss parameters (%TWL, %EWL), metabolic outcomes, operative time, complications, and reoperation rates. Random-effects meta-analysis was performed using RevMan 5.4.
resultsTen studies met inclusion criteria, comprising 1,556 patients: 739 undergoing revisional OAGB and 817 revisional RYGB. Follow-up ranged from 12 to 60 months. GERD resolution rates were comparable between revisional OAGB (68.6%, 81/118) and revisional RYGB (80.6%, 150/186), with no significant difference (risk difference = 0.10, 95% CI -0.04 to 0.24, p = 0.19, I²=96%). However, de novo GERD showed a trend toward higher incidence after conversion to OAGB (6.3%, 16/255) compared to conversion to RYGB (0.5%, 1/180) (risk difference = -0.23, 95% CI -0.57 to 0.11, p = 0.16, I²=92%). Conversion to OAGB demonstrated significantly greater weight loss compared to conversion to RYGB (MD = + 5.70% TWL, 95% CI 4.84 to 6.57, p < 0.00001, I²=0%). Operative time was significantly shorter for conversion to OAGB (MD = -24.79 min, 95% CI -32.11 to -17.47, p < 0.00001, I²=92%). No significant differences were observed in leak rates, bleeding, or marginal ulceration.
conclusionsConversion to OAGB provides GERD symptom relief comparable to conversion to RYGB, with similar resolution rates in patients with established reflux. However, RYGB may be preferable when definitive GERD treatment is the primary indication, given the trend toward lower de novo GERD risk. Conversion to OAGB offers advantages in weight loss efficacy and shorter operative time. The choice should be individualized based on patient-specific factors and primary indication for revision.
Indexed as
Identifiers
41925810What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.